Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

is FLAME. Unless URM or IP. No one got over 15 screenings; and no one who just made the top third got 11 CB's. Unless URM or IP. And no one got 10 offers. Even with the URM or IP status. Not at Georgetown! Top of the class could not even get those results, so certainly not someone who barely made top third. I know at least six people, LR and top 15% who had 12 screenings in DC bidding mostly DC and received less than 5 CBs. 2 V10's from the top third at Georgetown - Get Real.

Above poster - chill out. Hiring through OCI isn't scientific. There are people (very few) at median at BU with and offer (seriously) and people top 10% and LR with none. A lot of times it boils down to how likable you are and if you click with the people there. OCI isn't grades + journal = HIRE! People need to stop thinking this is like the LS admissions process. OCI involves a good deal of luck - some people just greatly outperform their grades, some greatly under-perform, it happens.

is FLAME. Unless URM or IP. No one got over 15 screenings; and no one who just made the top third got 11 CB's. Unless URM or IP. And no one got 10 offers. Even with the URM or IP status. Not at Georgetown! Top of the class could not even get those results, so certainly not someone who barely made top third. I know at least six people, LR and top 15% who had 12 screenings in DC bidding mostly DC and received less than 5 CBs. 2 V10's from the top third at Georgetown - Get Real.

Maybe our OCI office is trolling on this site.

If this is true, DC market blows even more than I thought. Between NY and Boston I had 28 screens and 15 call-backs. I'm top 15% @ BU. Glad I didn't waist my money on Georgetown.

is FLAME. Unless URM or IP. No one got over 15 screenings; and no one who just made the top third got 11 CB's. Unless URM or IP. And no one got 10 offers. Even with the URM or IP status. Not at Georgetown! Top of the class could not even get those results, so certainly not someone who barely made top third. I know at least six people, LR and top 15% who had 12 screenings in DC bidding mostly DC and received less than 5 CBs. 2 V10's from the top third at Georgetown - Get Real.

Let's not go lashing out at other posters like this, please. Questioning is one thing, but calling flame is a bit much. Giving your own stats and saying what you have (or haven't) heard of is enough to warn people of what you think. We don't want people to be discouraged from posting success stories out of fear of being called flame.

To answer a few questions, of course I am bitter. But all of that info is also true. DC did suck and GULC for the last three years has placed less than a third of the class in firms from OCI. Somehow, our median private sector salary is still advertised as 160k.

Anonymous User wrote:I was the one calling flame. Sorry it came off so harsh.

To answer a few questions, of course I am bitter. But all of that info is also true. DC did suck and GULC for the last three years has placed less than a third of the class in firms from OCI. Somehow, our median private sector salary is still advertised as 160k.

Don't want to hijack the thread anymore, so once again sorry.

I'm top 1/3 non URM non IP and I got 16 screening interviews, all DC. Eight from the lottery, the rest from mass mails to DC firms right before OCI and/or firms who got my resume through the lottery. Now, did that translate into a lot of callbacks and offers? Hell no. I have one offer by the skin of my teeth. I swear that some firms were laughing me out of the screening interviews. I think that when it comes to OCI and you're not at the tip-top of the class, only one word applies: LUCK.

Regardless, your frustration is warranted. You've got 600+ kids at GULC and if 30% get firm/public service jobs through OCI (a big if) that's still 400 people still applying for jobs. Wow. I wish some of the people in the "Applying to GULC or school xyz!!!! OMG!!" threads would come to the employment forum for a visit.

School range: T 25Market(s): Chicago, MinneapolisApprox. class rank: Top 15 %Law review: "Secondary," though it is more selective/more well-known than our law review (I chose this over law review)Work experience: Straight from CollegeIP background: NoAnything else that might have an impact?: Good "softs"-- President of student body, etc.Self-assessed interview ability (1-10): 9Screening Interviews: 13Mass mails: 0Callbacks received: 10Callbacks accepted: 8Offers: 4-- One v100. Accepted from a v200 and one of the largest firms in U.S.

is FLAME. Unless URM or IP. No one got over 15 screenings; and no one who just made the top third got 11 CB's. Unless URM or IP. And no one got 10 offers. Even with the URM or IP status. Not at Georgetown! Top of the class could not even get those results, so certainly not someone who barely made top third. I know at least six people, LR and top 15% who had 12 screenings in DC bidding mostly DC and received less than 5 CBs. 2 V10's from the top third at Georgetown - Get Real.

They are surprising stats, given how difficult the market was (I'm top 10/15% at GULC, not LR), but not fully impossible (though if the V10s were DC, then it makes no sense to me, b/c Williams and Covington wouldn't take top 1/3, let's be honest). DC was rough, maybe this person's work experience really helped, and props to the person for doing so well. I'm curious who it is though; I haven't heard of anyone with those stats doing so well. I know maybe 1 or 2 people who are Top 5/10 that did that well in DC.

is FLAME. Unless URM or IP. No one got over 15 screenings; and no one who just made the top third got 11 CB's. Unless URM or IP. And no one got 10 offers. Even with the URM or IP status. Not at Georgetown! Top of the class could not even get those results, so certainly not someone who barely made top third. I know at least six people, LR and top 15% who had 12 screenings in DC bidding mostly DC and received less than 5 CBs. 2 V10's from the top third at Georgetown - Get Real.

They are surprising stats, given how difficult the market was (I'm top 10/15% at GULC, not LR), but not fully impossible (though if the V10s were DC, then it makes no sense to me, b/c Williams and Covington wouldn't take top 1/3, let's be honest). DC was rough, maybe this person's work experience really helped, and props to the person for doing so well. I'm curious who it is though; I haven't heard of anyone with those stats doing so well. I know maybe 1 or 2 people who are Top 5/10 that did that well in DC.

The V10s could be DC. Cleary, STB, Kirkland are all "V10" firms with DC offices.

I think the posters' results are believable if he had a really great resume and was a great interviewer. Top 1/3 at GULC is not an auto-ding at STB DC, etc, and if he had 5 years at a federal agency or something similar he could easily rack up callbacks at firms outside the W&C/Covington/Wilmer echelon .

Comments: I love the firm I've ended up at and feel very fortunate. Next year someone should put up a PSA around mid-July urging rising 2Ls to start their mass mail campaign. I found mine surprisingly effective.

Are the self-assessed interviewing scores supposed to be compared to the average law student or compared to the population at large?

I just mean, I see people saying they are a 9, but then having fewer than half their callbacks turn into offers. And maybe they are in the top 90% of the population at large considering interviewing skills, but if they were in the top 90% of interviewing law students and had already made it through the grade cutoffs etc. in the screener, those callbacks would most likely be offers.

Am I way over-thinking this? It just seems like if you're really a 9 out of 10 in terms of law students, then about 9/10ths of your callbacks (which are mostly about fit) should be turning into offers.

Anonymous User wrote:Are the self-assessed interviewing scores supposed to be compared to the average law student or compared to the population at large?

I just mean, I see people saying they are a 9, but then having fewer than half their callbacks turn into offers. And maybe they are in the top 90% of the population at large considering interviewing skills, but if they were in the top 90% of interviewing law students and had already made it through the grade cutoffs etc. in the screener, those callbacks would most likely be offers.

Am I way over-thinking this? It just seems like if you're really a 9 out of 10 in terms of law students, then about 9/10ths of your callbacks (which are mostly about fit) should be turning into offers.

Anonymous User wrote:Are the self-assessed interviewing scores supposed to be compared to the average law student or compared to the population at large?

I just mean, I see people saying they are a 9, but then having fewer than half their callbacks turn into offers. And maybe they are in the top 90% of the population at large considering interviewing skills, but if they were in the top 90% of interviewing law students and had already made it through the grade cutoffs etc. in the screener, those callbacks would most likely be offers.

Am I way over-thinking this? It just seems like if you're really a 9 out of 10 in terms of law students, then about 9/10ths of your callbacks (which are mostly about fit) should be turning into offers.

Affirmative.

Noted, and appreciated. All should ignore above over-analytical ramblings.

School Range: Chicago or NorthwesternMarket(s): Chi, NYC (contingency plan)Approx. class rank: Top 5%Law Review: YWork experience: 2+ years paralegal; political work in college came up a lot in my interviewsIP: NoAnything else that might have an impact: Had scheduling issues that made me not get interviews until very late (or at all) with some top firms that were good targets for my stats (Kirkland/Sidley Chi and the V5 in NYC). DO NOT MISS ANY PART OF OCI. I'm also interested only in transactional work.Self-assessed interview capability: 5. My interviewing and speaking is nothing special.Screening interviews: 25 (22 Chi, 3 NYC)Mass mails: 6 (NYC) led to 2 additional screenings and callbacks.Callbacks received: 12 (7 Chi, 5 NYC)Callbacks accepted: 10 (5 Chi, 5 NYC).Offers: 3 NYC (V10, V15, V50); 2 Chi (V30, V50)

Comments: Still debating between the two Chicago offers, and leaning toward the V30. Concerned about whether or not there's enough transactional work to go around there, but if there is, it's a great firm for me. If not, I should be competitive at 3L OCI.

The V10s could be DC. Cleary, STB, Kirkland are all "V10" firms with DC offices.

I think the posters' results are believable if he had a really great resume and was a great interviewer. Top 1/3 at GULC is not an auto-ding at STB DC, etc, and if he had 5 years at a federal agency or something similar he could easily rack up callbacks at firms outside the W&C/Covington/Wilmer echelon .

V10's hiring GULC students with 4.4's? I'm skeptical, in light of the data given us by OCS over the last decade. But I guess this person could just be the best interviewer in history with the best WE for corporate law.

Info from OCS on the V10 selectivity over the past decade, median GPA hired for summer positions.

And Kirkland DC has a 3.54; maybe NY with a 3.34 (median post curve change; near top third prior)

The above data was prior to the curve increase and the reduction of summer classes. Meaning everyone have a GPA of at least about .15 better than before (theoretically) and firms are more selective (obviously). These were top 10% numbers before the curve change, it used to be around 3.63 for top 10%; that won't even get you top 15% in most sections.

The V10s could be DC. Cleary, STB, Kirkland are all "V10" firms with DC offices.

I think the posters' results are believable if he had a really great resume and was a great interviewer. Top 1/3 at GULC is not an auto-ding at STB DC, etc, and if he had 5 years at a federal agency or something similar he could easily rack up callbacks at firms outside the W&C/Covington/Wilmer echelon .

V10's hiring GULC students with 4.4's? I'm skeptical, in light of the data given us by OCS over the last decade. But I guess this person could just be the best interviewer in history with the best WE for corporate law.

Info from OCS on the V10 selectivity over the past decade, median GPA hired for summer positions.

And Kirkland DC has a 3.54; maybe NY with a 3.34 (median post curve change; near top third prior)

The above data was prior to the curve increase and the reduction of summer classes. Meaning everyone have a GPA of at least about .15 better than before (theoretically) and firms are more selective (obviously). These were top 10% numbers before the curve change, it used to be around 3.63 for top 10%; that won't even get you top 15% in most sections.

The medians are for the otherwise indistinguishable mass of students. I'm not sure of GULC gives minimums, but at least here at NU those are often substantially lower than the median.

If the guy has a stellar resume or specific skills, the cut-off matters a lot more to him than the median. Top 1/3 is definitely above the cut-off for at least two of those V10s.

It is Georgetown. There are people running around who worked in the government, etc, before law school. DC firms do put substantial weigh on that sort of WE (I say that from first-hand experience). Top 1/3 wouldn't disqualify him from those firms if all of the other pieces were there.

I'll just say I know of one data point from UVA of someone below median with callbacks from some of the firms named above. For many firms, even V10s, the minimums are indeed much lower than the medians. Like the minimum might be 3.2-3.3 even though the median is 3.5-3.7

Anonymous User wrote:I'll just say I know of one data point from UVA of someone below median with callbacks from some of the firms named above. For many firms, even V10s, the minimums are indeed much lower than the medians. Like the minimum might be 3.2-3.3 even though the median is 3.5-3.7